rspec users - Apr 2009 - Current Evaluation of RSpec

On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Nicholas Van Weerdenburg
<vanweerd at gmail.com> wrote:
> Looking around outside of the book, reading reviews of RSpec on the web
> seems tricky. Most reviews seem very dated, and as a result are misleading.
> Is this an accurate assessment?
I don''t think so.  The core syntax and sensibilities of RSpec
haven''t
changed in any disruptive way.  It''s added new features, like those
contexts and such, but there''s no compulsion to use them.  And to me
they don''t have much impact on the fundamental _flavor_ of RSpec.

The only part of any old RSpec lore that''s truly obsolete now is the
story runner.  Substitute "Cucumber" wherever you read "RSpec
Story
Runner" and substitute "beautiful" wherever you read
"it''s a pain."
Otherwise the progress is all pretty much evolutionary, not
revolutionary.

-- 
Have Fun,
   Steve Eley (sfeley at gmail.com)
   ESCAPE POD - The Science Fiction Podcast Magazine
   http://www.escapepod.org

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 1:09 AM, Stephen Eley <sfeley at gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 10:57 PM, Nicholas Van Weerdenburg
> <vanweerd at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Looking around outside of the book, reading reviews of RSpec on the web
>> seems tricky. Most reviews seem very dated, and as a result are
misleading.
>> Is this an accurate assessment?
>
> I don''t think so. ?The core syntax and sensibilities of RSpec
haven''t
> changed in any disruptive way. ?It''s added new features, like
those
> contexts and such, but there''s no compulsion to use them. ?And to
me
> they don''t have much impact on the fundamental _flavor_ of RSpec.
>
Well it depends on how far back you go, and how old those reviews are.

When RSpec first appeared the syntax was a bit different, and it added
a lot of methods to Kernel/Object.  Some of the folks who looked at it
in it''s early days had a negative reaction to that.

Some folks blogged about that reaction back then.  I kept my powder
dry IIRC.  About a year later, after seeing David C''s presentation at
RubyConf 2007, and talking to him I decided to give it another look. I
wrote this article:

http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/2008/01/29/why-i-dont-mind-using-rspec-in-fact-ive-come-to-love-it

And I haven''t looked back since.

I know that some well known Ruby/Rails personalities and companies
continued to disdain RSpec after the initial impression,  For example
here''s the article by my friend Rob Sanheim, which prompted me to
write that article.

http://robsanheim.com/2008/01/25/why-i-use-testspec-over-rspec/
  (It seems to be down right now, try googling for sanheim rspec and
check the cached version)

But that seems to be changing.

Rob wrote this more recently:

http://blog.thinkrelevance.com/2009/3/26/introducing-micronaut-a-lightweight-bdd-framework
-- 
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale

On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 2:04 PM, Nicholas Van Weerdenburg
<vanweerd at gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks. That''s what I''m trying to parse- a lot of people
are inspired to
> blog when something is new, but less so later on, so there is a lot of
> 2007/early 2008 posts from basic google searches.
> The evolution of RSpec is fascinating- very organic and collaborative.
For another recent barometer reading of how much ReSPECt RSpec gets
these days, have a look at http://rubytrends.com/

-- 
Rick DeNatale

Blog: http://talklikeaduck.denhaven2.com/
Twitter: http://twitter.com/RickDeNatale
WWR: http://www.workingwithrails.com/person/9021-rick-denatale
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/rickdenatale